We performed a comparison between CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Sophos UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."On the EBB user side, we were able to secure all the server root passwords and admin for Windows. This was a big win for us."
"It enables us to secure accounts and make sure they are compliant."
"The central password manager is the most valuable feature because the password is constantly changing. If an outsider threat came in and gained access to one of those passwords, they would not have access for long."
"It improves security in our company. We have more than 10,000 accounts that we manage in CyberArk. We use these accounts for SQLs, Windows Server, and Unix. Therefore, keeping these passwords up-to-date in another solution or software would be impossible. Now, we have some sort of a platform to manage passwords, distribute the inflow, and manage IT teams as well as making regular changes to it according to the internal security policies in our bank."
"It provides an accountability to the individuals who are using it, knowing that it is audited and tracked."
"We utilize PTA, and we are now integrating that into our risk management program so we can identify the uses of the vault which are outside of the norm, e.g., people accessing after hours. It has reduced the amount of time that we are looking through logs and audit logs."
"We like it for the ability to automatically change passwords. At least for my group, that's the best thing."
"CyberArk has allowed us to get the credentials and passwords out of hard-coded property files."
"The management suite is easy and the agent is easy to develop."
"The stability of Sophos UTM is very good. The solution has been stable since Sophos took over Cyberoam which was the original company providing this solution."
"It has allowed us to design a bespoke cloud space for our clients, while still having an excellent level of protection."
"It gives us the ability to manage our firewalls from the cloud and deploy a unified configuration onto them. Other competitors like Meraki have that ability, but they fail to optimize it in the way that Sophos has."
"Sophos SG UTM had all the basic functionality that you needed. It is user-friendly and easy to manage for any integrator."
"Sophos is a unified solution. We have anti-virus protection, firewall rules, knotting, and DACC all in one box."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"It does not take much effort or thinking to understand how it works."
"More than the product itself, there is room for improvement in the documentation. The documentation should be very detailed and very structured. It has a lot of good information, on one level, but I feel that it could be more elaborate and more structured."
"The one place where we found that this product really needs to improve is the cloud. Simple integrations don't exist, even today. We don't have anything specific on CyberArk for managing, SaaS products, SaaS vendors, SaaS credentials. I understand it's a vendor-based thing and that they have to coordinate with the other vendors to be able to do that, and there are integrations coming. But these are the major places where CyberArk definitely needs to invest some more time."
"The initial setup of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager difficulty depends on the environment that you are implementing it into. However, it typically is simple."
"Make it easier to deploy."
"Initial setup is complex. Lots of architecture, lots of planning, and lots of education and training are needed."
"This product needs professional consulting services to onboard accounts effectively based user profiles."
"CyberArk PAM is a very broad product as everyone's requirements for implementation are different. In our particular case, the initial implementation was planned and developed by people who didn't know our specific network requirements, so the initial implementation needed to be tweaked over time. While this is normal, at the time all these "major" changes required CyberArk professional services to come in-plant and "assist" with the changes."
"The authentication port is available in CyberArk Alero but not Fortinet products."
"It needs a better user interface. The one they have is not so good."
"The classification segregation of applications lacks sufficient definition."
"The initial setup may be difficult for those not familiar with the product."
"The interface configuration could be improved."
"The memory and processing were problematic. The interface could be better."
"We would like to have unique viewable IDs for rules and in the packet filter logfile, for easier debugging of old log files."
"Reporting: We have had to work manually in many of our reports."
"It does have built-in policies, which enable you to disable USB devices, etc. It would be nice if they had more policies because there are not that many of them."
More CyberArk Privileged Access Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is ranked 1st in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 144 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews. CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is rated 8.8, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CyberArk Privileged Access Manager writes "Lets you ensure relevant, compliant access in good time and with an audit trail, yet lacks clarity on MITRE ATT&CK". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Microsoft Entra ID, Delinea Secret Server, WALLIX Bastion and One Identity Safeguard, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
